Has anyone read the book Anthem, by Ayn Rand? I liked the book, and I think that most people that commented here would, even if you don't agree with her philosophy (Objectivism, I know I don't agree with it). I feel like the message OP is sending is also the message being sent in the book, in a way. While, where I live, we aknowledge people's differences every day, I guess there might be some places that don't. While we are different, it shouldn't mean different treatment under the law. That just leads back to Social Darwinism, which is the ****** excuse that European's used to take Africans as slaves (we are white and civilized, they are black and savages, we must take them and "civilize" them). Being different is great. When it comes to the law, if you were discriminated for any reason, it is bad. It has happened all the time in the history of the world, the best example coming to my head is the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, which prevented Chinese immigrants from entering the US. Doesn't seem fair when hundreds of thousands of white immigrants were still entering the country.
TLDR; Being different is good, discrimination (especially under the law) is bad.

Ayn Rand was a tortured soul who got a first hand experience with psychopatic collectivism and decided that if that is wrong then psychopatic individualism is good.
Though worse then what she was preaching is the way people today understand her message and think its a carte blanche to act like a selfish dick.

I get what op is going at here (or at least I suppose I do), but my position is that there is a base-line level of equal rights everyone should have and if we truly establish that world-wide, the question is: what those rights will be (and no, I do not think that the declaration of human rights suffices).

You misunderstand.
We're not talking about treating a no life junkie the same as a profound scientist. We're talking about treating everyone the same regarding their race and gender. A black junkie is just as bad as a white one.

For me too equality means being treated and treat people the same way no matter how different you or the others are.
I do my best to act that and the only exception is when I really like or love someone. It doesn't necessarly make me always happy but it is something I'm proud of and I wouldn't change it. I earn a lot thanks to it

my personal opinions
race and gender have no effect on equality i can be a black man or a womens equal
however inteligence talen and capability determin equality
if they are better or worse then me they are not my equal
tldr everyone is equal untile they prove themselves otherwise through their actions

Look at Olympic sprinters, then think about your question again. Different races of humans are like different breeds of dogs. We all have the same pieces, the pieces just vary and size and effectiveness from person to person.

GUISE LOOK, LOOK AT ME I HAVE AN OPINION
guise pls persecute me so my retarded half-baked attempts at thinking are justified

No, **** you. There is nobody on Earth with a brain that thinks people are inherently equal in their blood, there isn't even a radical example of this kind of person. Equality has never meant that, any idiot will tell you that it just means to treat people fairly and judge them by their character. This is the very foundation of the concepts of freedom and liberty. It is what generations of soldiers all across the first world fought for. It is such a truism that you must be incredibly ******* retarded to need to have it explained to you.

Either that, or you are an edgy cognitively biased ****. Maybe Hitler was right after all, these people are different by nature, so why shouldn't we treat them differently?

TL-DR (lol emoticons), you are retarded and deserve to be called out for it.

Remember, it's all about equal opportunity and satisfying human needs. The equilibrium point in most economies for the population who is able to work has it so that not everyone in that group can be employed while companies can still make profit and production can be maximized. That means, there will ALWAYS be structural unemployment. Getting a job is hard, and in most cases, unemployed people aren't lazy, it's a factor of the market and availability. Sure, they should be expected to take opportunities to sustain themselves and produce, but that requires giving them the opportunity in the first place. Should they be punished for looking for a job and not being able to obtain one? That's why we need institutions such as shelters. For every job you take, you deprive someone else of that job. That doesn't mean you're evil, but you have to understand that until advances in technology provides more jobs, there will be a lot of unemployment. There are lazy people, yes, and they will never improve, but those who wish to earn a living must be given that chance.